Focus Question: To what extent did Stephen Williams's life change when he was kidnapped by Wattanummon
Annotated Bibliography
1) Haefeli, Evan, and Kevin Sweeney. Captive Histories: English, French, And Native Narratives of the 1704 Deerfield Raid. Evan Haefeli and Kevin Sweeney. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2006 This source is a really nice book. It is non fiction, and it is an interesting book, mainly because the editors, Evan Haefeli and Kevin Sweeney, did not edit the words in this book, unless it was to translate the words into our modern words. For example, if in the olden days, the order of the words in the sentence is not the same as today, then they would probably change that, but mainly, this book is a bunch of primary and secondary sources that are bound together. This means that there must be many different point of views, because there were different sides to the raid. One of the sides was the point of view of the English, who thought of the Indians as savage beasts. Another point of view was from the Indians who thought that the English were mean people for stealing their bell, which was shipped to Deerfield illegally. That is partially the reason that the Indians raided. The last point of view is the French, which I didn’t go that deeply into, but they were mad because the bell had sealed the deal for the Indians to convert. Also, the editors did not put their point of view in the book, so there is nothing to not trust that they wrote.
2) Demos, John. The Unredeemed Captive: A Family Story from Early America. New York City: Alfred a. Knopf Inc., 1994 This source is also a nice source, even though it did not supply me with as much information as some other resources. It is actually a story book, but instead of a table of contents, it had an index, which really helped me look up the relevant information of Stephen Williams. It was a very good source and the actual story looks really good. I will most likely read it once the course is over. The actual information seems pretty accurate, because it goes along with other sources that I used to research Stephen Williams’s life. I also believe what John Demos wrote because he seems very well read, and he is currently s professor at an Ivy League college. He is currently Samuel Knight Professor of American History at Yale University, which is a really great college. Anyway, John Demos is a historian and that suggests that he can be believed, so I do believe him. 3) Sharpe, Elizabeth. "Deerfield Massacre (2008), http://www.fofweb.com.proxy5.noblenet.org/NuHistory/default.asp?ItemID=WE52&NewItemID=True. (accessed August 3, 2008) This source was the first source that I got. It is an article form the book, Disasters, Accidents, and Crises in American History, which is an encyclopedia. It really helped me get the cold, hard facts of the massacre, although it was only an overview. It did not go into great detail, but it did supply some numbers. Some of the numbers were how many people were involved and how many people died from each side. This really helped me put a picture in my mind about who won the actual fight, at first. All I had to do was read the numbers and I already knew who won, although I read it anyway. It was on Facts on File. I also trust this article for various reasons, but mainly because it is from a encyclopedia and encyclopedia’s are always supposed to carry correct and up to date information. Well, maybe not up to date, but the information in it is should be correct, otherwise, the publisher wouldn’t have published the encyclopedia in the first place. 4) 2004.http://www.1704.deerfield.history.museum/home.do (accessed August 3, 2008)
Really, this web site is the best bet for you if you are studying the Deerfield Massacre, because it is so cool. It was the most helpful source out of all of my sources. It contains all the names of important people in the raid, like Stephen Williams and his family, and the leader of the attack, a French man named Jean-Baptiste Hertel de Rouville. It even gives some slaves that participated in the attack. It also shows artifacts, and a video provides an overview, so this site was my most helpful resource. I really do trust this site because it has won many national awards and my teacher trusts it. Some of the awards that it has won are: · One of Ten Best Websites for 2005 by the Christian Science Monitor · One of three end of the year "Hot Websites" by USA Today · One of January 2006's Best Websites by eSchool News These awards are from national magazines and one of them is from a school magazine, so I think that this site is really trustworthy. Also, they have won more awards than that, which really does suggest that this site is a good one.
5) Partridge, Samuel. "Samuel Partridge, An Account of the Destruction of Deerfield." (1704): 63-66 This source was like the Facts on File article. It was an overview in the English point of view. The only difference was that it went into greater detail than the other one. It was also appears to be written on the spot, because it is hastily written. It goes into detail about the cold hard facts and that is the second source that I used because it went into a little more detail. It was a really good source. I believe this account because it matches other accounts that I have read even from the Indian side of the story. The only difference between this account and Indian accounts is that the objective of the attack is different and how they treated the people when they were kidnapping people.
Focus Question: To what extent did Stephen Williams's life change when he was kidnapped by Wattanummon
Annotated Bibliography
1) Haefeli, Evan, and Kevin Sweeney. Captive Histories: English, French, And Native Narratives of the 1704 Deerfield Raid. Evan Haefeli and Kevin Sweeney. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2006
This source is a really nice book. It is non fiction, and it is an interesting book, mainly because the editors, Evan Haefeli and Kevin Sweeney, did not edit the words in this book, unless it was to translate the words into our modern words. For example, if in the olden days, the order of the words in the sentence is not the same as today, then they would probably change that, but mainly, this book is a bunch of primary and secondary sources that are bound together.
This means that there must be many different point of views, because there were different sides to the raid. One of the sides was the point of view of the English, who thought of the Indians as savage beasts. Another point of view was from the Indians who thought that the English were mean people for stealing their bell, which was shipped to Deerfield illegally. That is partially the reason that the Indians raided. The last point of view is the French, which I didn’t go that deeply into, but they were mad because the bell had sealed the deal for the Indians to convert. Also, the editors did not put their point of view in the book, so there is nothing to not trust that they wrote.
2) Demos, John. The Unredeemed Captive: A Family Story from Early America. New York City: Alfred a. Knopf Inc., 1994
This source is also a nice source, even though it did not supply me with as much information as some other resources. It is actually a story book, but instead of a table of contents, it had an index, which really helped me look up the relevant information of Stephen Williams. It was a very good source and the actual story looks really good. I will most likely read it once the course is over.
The actual information seems pretty accurate, because it goes along with other sources that I used to research Stephen Williams’s life. I also believe what John Demos wrote because he seems very well read, and he is currently s professor at an Ivy League college. He is currently Samuel Knight Professor of American History at Yale University, which is a really great college. Anyway, John Demos is a historian and that suggests that he can be believed, so I do believe him.
3) Sharpe, Elizabeth. "Deerfield Massacre (2008), http://www.fofweb.com.proxy5.noblenet.org/NuHistory/default.asp?ItemID=WE52&NewItemID=True. (accessed August 3, 2008)
This source was the first source that I got. It is an article form the book, Disasters, Accidents, and Crises in American History, which is an encyclopedia. It really helped me get the cold, hard facts of the massacre, although it was only an overview. It did not go into great detail, but it did supply some numbers. Some of the numbers were how many people were involved and how many people died from each side. This really helped me put a picture in my mind about who won the actual fight, at first. All I had to do was read the numbers and I already knew who won, although I read it anyway. It was on Facts on File.
I also trust this article for various reasons, but mainly because it is from a encyclopedia and encyclopedia’s are always supposed to carry correct and up to date information. Well, maybe not up to date, but the information in it is should be correct, otherwise, the publisher wouldn’t have published the encyclopedia in the first place.
4) 2004.http://www.1704.deerfield.history.museum/home.do (accessed August 3, 2008)
Really, this web site is the best bet for you if you are studying the Deerfield Massacre, because it is so cool. It was the most helpful source out of all of my sources. It contains all the names of important people in the raid, like Stephen Williams and his family, and the leader of the attack, a French man named Jean-Baptiste Hertel de Rouville. It even gives some slaves that participated in the attack. It also shows artifacts, and a video provides an overview, so this site was my most helpful resource.
I really do trust this site because it has won many national awards and my teacher trusts it. Some of the awards that it has won are:
· One of Ten Best Websites for 2005 by the Christian Science Monitor
· One of three end of the year "Hot Websites" by USA Today
· One of January 2006's Best Websites by eSchool News
These awards are from national magazines and one of them is from a school magazine, so I think that this site is really trustworthy. Also, they have won more awards than that, which really does suggest that this site is a good one.
5) Partridge, Samuel. "Samuel Partridge, An Account of the Destruction of Deerfield." (1704): 63-66
This source was like the Facts on File article. It was an overview in the English point of view. The only difference was that it went into greater detail than the other one. It was also appears to be written on the spot, because it is hastily written. It goes into detail about the cold hard facts and that is the second source that I used because it went into a little more detail. It was a really good source.
I believe this account because it matches other accounts that I have read even from the Indian side of the story. The only difference between this account and Indian accounts is that the objective of the attack is different and how they treated the people when they were kidnapping people.